THE MUELLER-WILSON REPORT PART TWO THE AMERICAN COMPANION REPORT TO THE PROJECT: THE RIGHT OF SELF DETERMINATION OF PEOPLES AND ITS APPLICATION REGARDING INDIGENOUS PEOPLES IN THE USA BY MR RONALD WEST SPONSORED BY THE MUELLER LAW OFFICES (original) (raw)
Related papers
9 US-China Law Review, 2012, p. 427-456
The present paper delves into the rich jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on indigenous peoples. Starting from the right to property, the Court of San José became the first regional jurisdictional organ to pronounce in favour of the sovereignty of indigenous peoples over their ancestral lands and natural resources. Building on the collective nature of indigenous cultures, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) has followed a collective approach as regards the protection of other rights (e.g. the right to life) and the award of reparations. The IACtHR's jurisprudence has influenced positively the protection of the indigenous communities at the national level and is expected to have the same positive influence on the prospective jurisprudence of other international judicial bodies.
American Indian Law-Elucidating Constitutional Law
The incorporation of American Indian law into the study of Constitutional Law accomplishes a number of pedagogical goals as well as understanding questions concerning American Indian law that naturally evolve in the study. This broadened understanding of the United States Constitution helps to explain the complex subject of opinion writing and the role of politics in reading United States Supreme Court decisions. From a practice perspective, the incorporation of American Indian law into a Constitutional Law study further serves the purpose of explaining legal distinctions, which enable future practitioners to be knowledgeable in "spotting" issues where clients present such facts. In the first introduction of the Constitutional Law class, it takes only a few minutes to raise the subject of Indians in the United States Constitution. This discussion helps to lay the groundwork for the issues that arise throughout the course. Mentioning Indian issues may be problematic because...
1994
The debate over which legal Indigenous Peoples should govern Native American political power and property rights, or even whether they should be protected by law at all, caused conflicts challenging the autonomy of the legal system and led to changes of the original principles of Indian rights. The outcome of that conflict raises two questions of federal Indian law. One is where its principles contributed to the survival of Native Americans in the United States; the other is whether the same legal principles are responsible for the perpetual inferiority of Natives Americans in their own land. More starkly, the question is whether the law ought to be praised or cursed for what it has done to the Indian
2017
We appreciate the opportunity to participate in this symposium, convened to examine Professor Wenona Singel's article, Indian Tribes and Human Rights Accountability. Amongst her many professional accomplishments, Professor Singel is well known as a scholar in American Indian law, the Chief Justice of an active tribal appellate court, and a Reporter on the American Law Institute's Restatement of American Indian Law. Her influence, therefore, is felt and respected throughout the academy, the practicing bar, and Indian country. At an early stage of her career, Professor Singel is already recognized as a thought-leader, someone who is both brave and careful in her willingness to articulate and address some of the most trenchant challenges in American Indian law. Professor Singel's newest article is perhaps the most evocative example of her intellectual and community leadership. Her observation that Indian tribes could, on occasion, do better in extending civil and human righ...